[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH linux-2.6.18-xen] blktap: make max # of tap devices a module parameter
>>> On 22.02.11 at 18:44, Daniel Stodden <daniel.stodden@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 12:34 -0500, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> On 02/22/11 16:49, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>>> On 22.02.11 at 15:20, Laszlo Ersek<lersek@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> should anybody still use the blktap(1) driver in linux-2.6.18-xen, the >> >> following patch intends to make the maximum number of tapdevs >> >> configurable at module insertion time. The number is clamped to [256 .. >> >> NR_EVENT_CHANNELS]. I removed the definition of MAX_DEV_NAME because it >> >> didn't seem to be used at all. >> >> >> >> Thanks for considering, >> >> Laszlo Ersek >> > >> > Without replacing the call to register_chrdev() with one to >> > __register_chrdev() (available only with 2.6.32 and newer) I >> > can't see how you would get beyond 256 devices with the >> > changes you propose. >> >> Oops, sorry; I naively assumed that minor device numbers were already >> covered by an earlier change. >> >> I figure register_chrdev() could be reimplemented in blktap, based on >> lower-level char_dev.c (and kobject) primitives, but I'm not sure if the >> original goal is worth that ugliness. In any case, should I bother >> posting a version like that eventually, or would it have no chance of >> being accepted? > > I'm pretty sure minors > 256 date way before 2.6.32. Here's the module > init fragment from blktap2, replacing the register_chrdev() call: Sure, just that you have do more things "manually". > int __init > blktap_ring_init(void) > { > dev_t dev = 0; > int err; > > cdev_init(&blktap_ring_cdev, &blktap_ring_file_operations); > blktap_ring_cdev.owner = THIS_MODULE; > > err = alloc_chrdev_region(&dev, 0, MAX_BLKTAP_DEVICE, "blktap2"); > if (err < 0) { > BTERR("error registering ring devices: %d\n", err); > return err; > } > > err = cdev_add(&blktap_ring_cdev, dev, MAX_BLKTAP_DEVICE); > if (err) { > BTERR("error adding ring device: %d\n", err); > unregister_chrdev_region(dev, MAX_BLKTAP_DEVICE); > return err; > } > > blktap_ring_major = MAJOR(dev); > BTINFO("blktap ring major: %d\n", blktap_ring_major); > > return 0; > } Any reason why in .32 and newer you still don't use __register_chrdev() (and __unregister_chrdev())? And even if this still needs to be this way, I note that unregister_chrdev() calls __unregister_chrdev_region() before cdev_del(), while blktap_ring_exit() does it the other way around? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |